Help Choosing Canon 20D Setup (Body, lenses, flash, etc)

Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.

"A" wrote in message
...
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

You are definitely ready to go digital!

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

I have a 300D and it's a great camera. The 20D is a lot better. The
Minolta might be just fine, too.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

If you can afford the 17-85, go for it.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

I have the IS version and get shots without a tripod that would be
impossible (for me) to get otherwise.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

The 420EX should be fine unless you need some of the exotic features and the
higher output of the 550EX. Also, you might want to look at the Sigma 500
DG super.

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Personally, I'd never buy a Microdrive. 1GB CF cards give a fair bang for
the buck.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Only you can decide.

Hi A

You only live once

What's a couple of bucks on a system like that?

Personally I'd run with the Canon and apply a serious bit of chinese wrist
burn to your retail outlet

Ask to see the manager - lay down the spec then negotiate

If you get fed up with it in a few months time - just ship it over to me :-)

Aerticus

ps - you will not thank me for this now b-u-t in the long run you'd be
better of with Photoshop CS (enrol at a night school - anything at all that
will allow you to qualify for the academic version of the full CS suite from
Adobe. Your free time for the next few years has now evaporated)

A
"A" wrote in message
...
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.

A wrote:
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing
film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is
a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed.

I am not sure you have really great reasons to changing, but that is
your choice.

Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to
go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

I agree. I now own a 20D



So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

I chose the 20D in part due to the specs, but also due to the fact that
much of my Canon equipment would carry over. I did not really research the
Nikon line, although I have nothing bad to say about them.


20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

The 17-55 is a very versatile lens. Remember than that 55mm is equal to
about 88mm. For me that works very well. Of course I already had the
24-85mm lens so I have a good coverage for other situations that the 17-55
might not cover. It all depends on your personal usage. That 24-85 does
well for most of my sports work. The 17-55 is a good general use lens. BTW
the 17-55 is not quite as sharp as the 24-85, but is well wroth the cost.
Maybe you will want to get it to start with, based on the cost alone.


20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never
had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses
in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to
just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

I have not had any problems with my 75-300 USM, but if I did not own
it, I would likely go for the IS lens.


20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX,
and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy,
and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works
better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be
a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX,
except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Not from me. I have not used flash much in recent years, so I have
limited my flash to the built in flash so far. I will be reading replies to
this question however.


Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card.
The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

I chose two 1 GB cards. About the same cost and with two cards if one
goes bad, you are not dead. I some situations, it means you can continue to
shoot while your assistant downloads the other card.


Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.

--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math

Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup

until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money.

You pointed out your best alternative.

Right now, there is no better value in digital than a slightly used
version of yesterday's news. The 10D is going for less than $950, and I
recently paid $612 for a very nice D60.

Let someone else take the brunt of the initial cost, and make yourself
the beneficiary of their dire need for the latest & greatest.

For folks who can afford the newest, great. For the rest of us, keep in
mind that just a few years ago, the D30 was THE hot item. You can have
one today for a fraction of the cost.

With all respects, if you are bothered having film half used in your camera,
then spending four figures on new equipment you may not use that much may be
a mistake at the moment. Prices are coming down all the time. I'd stay put
until you couldn't afford NOT to buy one.

By the way, the Nikon D70 has a 1/500th sync speed against Canons 1/250th.

gerry wrote:

With all respects, if you are bothered having film half used in your camera,
then spending four figures on new equipment you may not use that much may be
a mistake at the moment. Prices are coming down all the time. I'd stay put
until you couldn't afford NOT to buy one.

By the way, the Nikon D70 has a 1/500th sync speed against Canons 1/250th.

But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and
have used the digital all the time. (It's easy to 'process' a
'half used' memory card..) I really ought to shoot off that film,
but just automatically pick up the digital, especially since I'd
have to get down to a shop to drop it off and pick it up etc.

I'm not sure I agree on the OP's comment that accessories are more
expensive for Nikon than Canon. The lenses are likely to be more
than the body for either camera, and the Canon lenses seem to cost
more across the board. If she makes her choice and buys good Canon
or Nikon gear, then she could upgrade the body later and still use
the lenses. If he avoids the EF-S/DX, he could even use them on a
film 35mm. The only money she'll be wasting would be the difference
between the body now and the body later. So maybe a cheaper D70
[waiting for the next generation] or a 10D could be an idea.

--
Ken Tough

Ken Tough wrote:

But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and


"half-used film" -- does that mean it's underexposed by 1 stop?




;-)


Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and

"half-used film" -- does that mean it's underexposed by 1 stop?

I tried to avoid the same thing happening years ago by taking
the roll out mid-use to be put back in later. After a few years
I forgot what it was, re-shot it, and so ended up with a roll
of mostly double-exposures. So it went from being half used
to being twice used. Bugger.

--
Ken Tough

Ken Tough wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:


Ken Tough wrote:

But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and

"half-used film" -- does that mean it's underexposed by 1 stop?


I tried to avoid the same thing happening years ago by taking
the roll out mid-use to be put back in later. After a few years
I forgot what it was, re-shot it, and so ended up with a roll
of mostly double-exposures. So it went from being half used
to being twice used. Bugger.


'twas just a little exposure humor. I do mid-rolls from time to time. I carry
a sharpie in my bag (well more than one) and carefully note the next unexposed
fram no. on the cassette. Then I put a strip of electricans tape over the film
can lid as a reminder that the roll therein is part exposed. I have screwed up
a couple times but generally get it right. Knocks on wood.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.